Does smart home technology give police a window into your “nest”?
The internet of things is rampantly overtaking every area of life. Most of us carry smartphones nearly every waking hour. When we’re out and about, GPS systems and commercial security cameras make it easy to track our whereabouts. And an increasingly popular type of technology blankets virtually all areas of our homes in surveillance.
These smart home systems are designed to make life more convenient. They allow us to remotely lock doors, adjust the thermostat, control the lights and make sure that we didn’t accidentally leave the garage door open. They include listening devices like Amazon’s Alexa and Google Home. And they include sweeping security systems that record time-stamped video footage, among other things.
Just one of these systems could play a pivotal role in a criminal investigation. And taken together, they give police a virtual window into our lives, detailing our every movement and, potentially, every conversation.
How smart technology implicated one man in his wife’s murder
Just last year, data from a smart security system implicated a 40-year-old Connecticut man in his wife’s murder. When police first arrived at the couple’s home, the husband – tied to a chair and bleeding – told an elaborate story of how a masked intruder shot his wife before running off. The husband claimed he’d come home from work because he got an alert from their security system. However, it turned out the alarm was activated from within the home. The timing of the alarm – as well as data from the victim’s Fitbit – undermined critical details in the husband’s story. He currently awaits trial on murder charges.
When and how can police access this data?
All police need to obtain troves of digital data is a search warrant – or, in some cases, even less than that. A warrant requires probable cause, which grants some degree of protection to the accused. Yet, some tech companies will turn over digital data even when there’s no warrant – in response to a subpoena or official police request, for example.
That’s why consumers should review the terms of service for each of their smart devices. Where is the audio/video footage or other data stored? Who has access to it? How long is it kept? How securely is it encrypted? And what’s the company policy on responding to requests for this data?
Granted, most people won’t bother to look into these details. But it’s certainly something to be aware of. Data from smart devices is bound to play a big role in criminal cases of all kinds, from burglary and arson to sex offenses and murder.
State v. B.S.: Not Guilty Verdict in First Degree Murder Case..
In this case, our client was charged with First Degree Murder in connection with a “drive by” shooting that occurred in Charlotte, NC. The State’s evidence included GPS ankle monitoring data linking our client was at the scene of the crime and evidence that our client confessed to an inmate while in jail. Nonetheless, we convinced a jury to unanimously find our client Not Guilty. He was released from jail the same day.
State v. S.G.: First Degree Murder Charge Dismissed..
Our client was charged with First Degree for the shooting death related to an alleged breaking and entering. The State’s evidence included a co-defendant alleging that our client was the shooter. After conducting a thorough investigation with the use of a private investigator, we persuaded the State to dismiss entirely the case against our client.
State v. B.D.: First Degree Murder Charged Dismissed..
After conducting an investigation and communicating with prosecutor about the facts and circumstances indicating that our client acted in self-defense, the case was dismissed and deemed a justifiable homicide.
State v. I.R.: Reduction from First Degree Murder to Involuntary Manslaughter and Concealment of Death..
Our client was charged with the First Degree Murder of a young lady by drug overdose. After investigating the decedent’s background and hiring a preeminent expert toxicologist to fight the State’s theory of death, we were able to negotiate this case down from Life in prison to 5 years in prison, with credit for time served.
State v. J.G.: .
Our client was charged with First Degree Murder related to a “drug deal gone bad.” After engaging the services of a private investigator and noting issues with the State’s case, we were able to negotiate a plea for our client that avoided a Life sentence and required him to serve only 12 years.